On Tuesday’s Mark Levin Show, It’s clear that the US supreme court is unwilling to act on the constitutional questions regarding the election but we must advocate nonetheless. Everything is on the line and everything is at stake. There is also absolute lawlessness going on in the state of Pennsylvania and their supreme court! Then, the media is focused on President Trump’s legal expenses but didn’t care when taxpayers were footing the bill for the Mueller witch hunt. The media should be focused on exposing the truth not criticizing the Trump campaign. Later, concerning Attorney General Bill Barr, the US DOJ does not have the foggiest idea if there is election voting fraud or not. The AG relies on the US Attorneys for that and they have been extremely passive. Plus, investigative reporter James O’Keefe, President of Project Veritas, calls in with bombshell recordings from CNN’s morning meetings where CEO Jeff Zucker dictates what will and won’t be covered in their biased and propagandistic coverage of Trump. Zucker makes it clear that this is a concerted effort to attack Trump from multiple angles and normalize propaganda with CNN’s viewers. Afterward, Rep. Rashida Tlaib retweeted a tweet using a phrase often associated with the demise of Jews. Anti-Semites using this phrase have referred to Israel as cancer that must be eliminated. Despite having been criticized for Anti-Semitic remarks in the past, Tlaib has gotten a pass on this trope from her allies in the leftwing media.
THIS IS FROM:
AP
Disputing Trump, Barr says no widespread election fraud
Post Millennial
Michigan witness testifies that military ballots looked like photocopies with ZERO votes for Trump
Twitter
#SCOTUS should hear the emergency appeal on the Pennsylvania election challenge.
Daily Wire
Officials From Trump’s Historic Operation Warp Speed Reveal Stunning Timeline For Vaccine Rollout
Chicago Sun Times
Black, Brown communities should get first dibs on coronavirus vaccine, minority leaders say
Washington Examiner
Race and ethnicity may be deciding factors in essential workers getting vaccine prioritization
Project Veritas
#CNNTapes Reveal Network’s Bias Against President Trump
Washington Free Beacon
Rashida Tlaib Scrubs Another Anti-Semitic Tweet
Washington Free Beacon
Top Sanders Aide Accuses Israel of Terrorism
Fox Business
Obama criticizes Americans for liking ‘cheap gas and big cars’ more than ‘the environment’
The podcast for this show can be streamed or downloaded from the Audio Rewind page.
Image used with permission of Getty Images / Robert Alexander
Rough transcript of Hour 1
Hour 1 Segment 1
You know, it’s amazing. Three hours is never enough on this program. And I’ve got a ton to do today. And I want to bring to your attention. But sometimes before I come on this program, even during a time I come on this program when I have friends and acquaintances email me. I have to scratch my head. I have to shake my head. Everybody wants to be an analyst. I’m not an analyst, I’m an advocate. We got people, friends of mine, lawyers who are out there predicting. I don’t think the Supreme Court’s going to take that, I’m very pessimistic about that case and so forth, and I’m sitting here. Well, what case would you be optimistic about? This is an uphill battle. It’s obvious from the Supreme Court’s conduct of the last five weeks that it has absolutely no interest so far. In ruling on any of the cases, including the one that’s been before it for at least a month regarding Article two. And whether a state court can rewrite a state election law. Eviscerating the Article two of the Constitution and undermining a state legislature, it’s not a matter of whether you’re optimistic or pessimistic so you can write another blog point and say, look at me, I was right. Or as I said last week, what is the point of this? What is the point of it? I don’t get it. Everything’s on the line, everything’s at stake. It’s the difference between analysts and advocates. People who take what’s going on in this country very, very seriously and want to defeat it and want to push back. Versus people who are commenting on it or observing it. And they feel the need to tell me. Well, don’t tell me. This case, it’s been brought in Pennsylvania. That I talked about at length yesterday, and Daniel Horowitz has a great piece up at The Blaze, and I’ve posted that a link to that as well. Should be a slam dunk case. The Commonwealth’s judge got it exactly right. She issued a temporary injunction, wants to have a hearing, says it’s likely the plaintiffs are going to win on the merits. The Constitution is black and white. The presidential rulings by the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania are black and white. Meanwhile, one law professor contact. No, I don’t see it that way. How you say you don’t know what the hell you’re talking about? Another law. I’m very pessimistic. Who cares? And then that Commonwealth attorney excuse me, judge, had the rug pulled out from under by five Democrats out of seven on the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania. And so they’ve appealed as of yesterday to the U.S. Supreme Court, they’ve made some very, very strong arguments. And I sit here and I get I get an email that says, you know, they were late, you know, the latches issue, two thirds of the brief deals with latches. That they wouldn’t have had standing under Pennsylvania law and certainly with that court and the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, so they had to wait for the election. So they make the point. They explain it in the brief, either a justice on the Supreme Court of the United States understands it and embraces or they don’t. We have absolute lawlessness going on in the state of Pennsylvania. Forget about fraud, absolute lawlessness, first by the state legislature, the governor, the secretary of state, and in the case of the governor and the secretary of state, repeatedly, we have lawlessness going on in the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania. You know, I’m not very optimistic about this lawsuit, and that’s what I have to hear. I said it’s an uphill battle, all these cases are uphill battles. But it’s not a matter of being pessimistic or optimistic and making predictions, I could care less. So don’t write me your crap. All these people sitting on the sidelines shooting spitballs. A good lawyer, smart lawyers aren’t getting paid a dime. They’re getting paid for their appearances and their hits. They’re not being paid a dime. For using their brain power. And working till 7:00 in the morning. And it’s not just working, working smart. These idiotic abstract arguments that I have to hear, and I’m very pessimistic. Keep it to yourself. And I turn on the TV. You know what the headline is, Mr. Producer? That the Trump team has raised one hundred and seventy million dollars in legal battle. Tommy, ladies and gentlemen, how much did the entirety of the federal government spend on the Russia collusion Hulk’s? Billions. Billions. Why does it matter how much the Trump legal team is raising or spending on legal cases? Why is that relevant to anything? And to any one. It’s not. Who cares? That’s just shocking to me. And they try and turn some of our lawyers into conspiracy theorists. When the whole culture, the whole society. When complete industries, whether it’s Hollywood. Our television. Or news or politicians were all involved in one conspiracy theory after another when it came to Russia. And they’re now pointing at people about conspiracy theories. Is this some kind of a joke? Now, I want to address my friend Bill Barr. And I think he is my friend. I like him very much like doing the interview with him and so forth. The truth of the matter is. The United States Department of Justice doesn’t have the foggiest idea if there is systemic fraud or not. And I know having served as a chief of staff to an attorney general, the attorney general’s not in the trenches. He has to rely on the United States attorney, so the USA is, as we like to say. The USA had been utterly passive. Almost to the point of disgraceful. I’m going to give you a specific example now, when you give a specific example, people say, well, that’s just one example because critics are used to talking in generalities with no facts and no examples. I’m going to give you one example. I came on this program not long ago, and I read to you an email. I read to an email that was sent to the judges of election. In Delaware County, Pennsylvania, Delaware County is one of the big suburban counties outside of Philadelphia. It is a big county with a lot of people. When I was a kid, it was a solid Republican county. Now it is a solid Democrat county for the most part. And this was sent out by a top election official. And the subject is and this is November 12. Urgent Delaware County Board of Elections, missing precinct data action required from judges of election, so it’s not one case. It’s across the entire county. It’s a big county. Dear Delaware County poll worker. Thank you very much for your service on Election Day. We know that it was a long day and that things may have been missed during the closing procedures at the end of the night. Unfortunately, due to missing data, election results from your precinct cannot be confirmed and approved for final tabulation until the missing data is reconciled. In order to ensure that all votes cast will be counted, we need at least one member of your election team to come to the machine warehouse ASAP to help complete the forms. If you were the minority inspector and were providing an envelope at the close of polls, please bring the envelope with you to ensure the county has as much data as possible to correct issues in the precinct. You believe this? And this is the county where they really can’t account for hundreds of thousands of votes, Mr. Turny General. But I’m not done, the missing data may be any of the following. Bullet missing yellow numbered list of voters, bullet incorrect numbers in the yellow book, that is numbers that do not match the scanner tabulation bullet missing ballot reconciliation forms. This impacts the ballot chain of custody, bullet, missing information, the close of Knight Returns sheet, bullet missing returns sheet. And in other words, the whole damn vote went to crap. We appreciate. Your commitment to serve the voters on Election Day and appreciate the time and effort spent helping the county in this endeavor. And it’s from the Delaware County poll worker coordinator, I have her name in her email and her phone number right in front of me. They never did figure it out. In fact, we now have whistleblowers and others who’ve come forward and say they were pressured to sign documents, that the information they had provided was accurate and complete when it wasn’t. Part two. This was brought to the attention of the United States attorney’s office in Philadelphia. Do you know what the United States attorney’s office in Philadelphia did with this, nothing. They said, that’s not my business, that’s not my jurisdiction. They couldn’t even get in the door. Furthermore, this was brought to the attention of the United States Department of Justice. Main justice in Washington, D.C., and you know what they said, we’ll pass it along now, what came of this at the Department of Justice? Absolutely nothing. They never followed up. They never followed up, not the US attorney’s office, not main justice. God knows how many of these events took place throughout the country. I have no idea. I have no idea. I think it was unfortunate that the attorney general would make a declaration. Saying there’s no widespread election fraud, none that’s been brought to us. Playing right into the hands of the media, which, of course, run with it. They like to take the words of the people they hate the most when they think those words will benefit their cause and splash them as headlines which get regurgitated for the next 72 hours. So now the attorney general in the Department of Justice are juxtaposed against the president, his campaign and their lawyers. I mean, that’s really pretty outrageous. AP News, an AP is the biggest of them all. Attorney General William Barr said Tuesday that the Justice Department has not uncovered evidence of widespread voter fraud that would change the outcome of the 2020 presidential election. Is there an investigation going on by the Department of Justice in these various states to determine if there’s widespread voter fraud? The answer is no. And that should have been the answer, the attorney general, in my humble opinion. We haven’t conducted an investigation to determine if there’s evidence of widespread voter fraud. His comments in an interview with the AP come despite President Donald Trump’s repeated. Baseless claims, this is a news report that the election was stolen, Trump’s effort to subvert the results of the 2020 presidential election and his refusal to concede is lost to President elect Joe Biden. This is a new story by Michael Balsamo, Michael Balsamo has no idea what’s going on either because Michael Bozsum has never gotten off his fast fat ass at a Washington, D.C. and gone into these various areas to see what’s taking place. Not once. So the people talking about this, in this case, the attorney general and Michael Balsamo actually have no idea what’s going on. Quote, Today, we have not seen fraud on a scale that could have affected a different outcome in the election, unquote. The attorney general told the AP. And so, of course, the president’s lawyers responded and said basically in plain English, how would they know? Since they’re not around, they’re not here, they’re not looking. More when I return.
Hour 1 Segment 2
This is at the Bungeni report, the great sites out there, Dominion contractor dropped bombshell that what she witnessed in Michigan was complete fraud, quote unquote. These people are testifying under oath. We’ve had more people testify under oath about corruption and fraud than ever testified under oath and the Russian collusion about any eyewitness testimony whatsoever. At the Michigan Senate Oversight Committee hearing on Tuesday, a woman who worked as a contractor for Dominion Voting Systems came forward to testify. She said what she witnessed was, quote, complete fraud. Speaking at the Bench Field Office Building in Lansing, Melissa Carone was welcomed by State Senator Ed Blum. Karen said that she was contracted by a temp staffing service to work with the Dominion voting systems work from November three, the next to through the next day. She said she was initially supposed to be working the Department of Elections. That was an order from Dominion voting system. What I witnessed at the center was complete fraud. The whole twenty seven hours I was there, there were batches of ballots being ran through the tabulating machines numerous times, getting counted eight to 10 times. I watched this with my own eyes. I was there to assist with it. These people on night shift, there were four people on night shift, one of whom I know for twenty years. He approached me and said he has absolutely zero training whatsoever. And it goes on Attorney General Barr.
Hour 1 Segment 3
Now, this hearing by the Dominion contractor was open. It was in Lansing, Michigan, where was the U.S. attorney in Lansing, Michigan. Did he miss the hearing? She said as regards the adjudication process, her name is Karen Chouest, quote, under the impression 100 percent that all of these workers were in on this, though. So it’s not a single ballot that the whole night, the whole 27 hours I was there. That was for Donald Trump, not one ballot. That is scary. There’s no reason for that. There was something going on at that Department of elections. And it’s clearly something that is very illegal. And I’m grateful to God that I didn’t go there. In questioning, she clarified that her position was to be a temporary worker for Dominion. She said that there was a big data loss as well on November three. She was asked as to the basis for her allegations that ballots were counted multiple times, she said, so the tabulating machines, when a ballot jams, it puts up an error, we’ll say discard or recount. So when it puts up that error, when a jam occurs, the correct way to go about it is to discard the whole batch, to take the ones that have already been tabulated, put them back into a pile. But the one that jammed on top, discard, discard the whole thing, then rescanned them. In other words, start over. They were not discarded. So they were just re scanning, re scanning and rescan and counting ballots, eight to 10 ballots just recounting them. They had absolutely no idea what they were doing. If you do not discard it, it is recounting it. Sabila, 25, had an issue you had already went through twenty four ballots, so you’re going to put them back all in a pile and you’re just going to rescan them. So you’ve now recounted twenty four ballots. And she goes on, sounds like pretty good sworn testimony to me, Attorney General Bar, where is the U.S. attorney? And she said this one go now one of the military ballots was registered voter and the ballots looked like they were all exactly the same Xerox copies of the ballot. They were all forbidden across the board. There wasn’t a single vote and none of that. The voters are registered. They had to manually enter the names and addresses at a birth date of one one twenty twenty, which would override the system and allow them to enter non registered voters, of which I saw several that day throughout the day. That’s how they would override voters that were either in the electronic public or the supplemental updated poll. But thank you. This woman has come forward. She’s given her name. She’s testifying in public in front of a Michigan committee. Her information’s available for the United States Department of Justice in the United States attorney for that district. And they’ve done nothing. And we’re getting a lot of testimony like this, and then we get stupid commentaries and know that’s not enough to change ballots. This is unbelievable. The amount of fraud and corruption that’s being presented is unbelievable. And the tolerance for it is unconscionable. Absolutely unconscionable. And notice, not a single Democrat gives a damn, not one, and notice not a single media person gives a damn, not one. We’ve had more witnesses, more sworn testimony, more written affidavits in the last three weeks than they had three and a half damn years on Russian collusion. What they’re trying to find somebody, anybody to testify. Were they have to subpoena the people to testify here, we have hundreds of people coming forward saying, let me tell you what I saw. It’s unbelievable. And they’re blown off. There are broomed off like they don’t exist. I don’t see systemic fraud. Now, Senator Ted Cruz is a serious man. He’s argued multiple cases before the United States Supreme Court. He was also involved in the 2000 election litigation that went up to the. United States Supreme Court in Bush versus Gore. Why do they keep bringing these a whole never Trump on TV, Mr. Producer, to comment on anything seriously? They represent 14 people in a phone booth, that’s it. Anyway, Ted just put out a statement. Interestingly enough, specifically about the case that I talked about yesterday and Daniel Horowitz has written about today, this Supreme Court case, which is not a fraud case in Pennsylvania. And he writes this today, an emergency appeal was filed in the U.S. Supreme Court challenging the election results in Pennsylvania. This appeal raises serious legal issues, and I believe the court should hear the case on an expedited basis. The Pennsylvania Constitution requires in-person voting except the narrow and defined circumstances. Late last year, the Pennsylvania legislature passed a law that purported to allow universal mail in voting, notwithstanding the Pennsylvania Constitution’s express prohibition. This appeal argues that Pennsylvania cannot change the rules in the middle of the game, if Pennsylvania wants to change our voting occurs, the state must follow the law to do so. In other words, it must follow the Constitution to do so. The illegality was compounded by a partisan Democrat Supreme Court in Pennsylvania, which has issued multiple decisions that reflect their political and ideological biases. Just over a month ago, Justice Alito, along with Justices Thomas and Gorsuch, wrote correctly, I believe, concerning the Pennsylvania court’s previous decision to count ballots received after Election Day, that, quote, There’s a strong likelihood that the state Supreme Court decision violates the federal constitution. In the current appeal, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court dismissed the claim based on a legal doctrine called latches, which essentially means the plaintiffs waited too long to bring the challenged. But the plaintiffs reasonably argue that the Pennsylvania Supreme Court has not applied that doctrine consistently and so they cannot selectively enforce it. Now they actually argue that. And they argue that the Supreme Court didn’t follow the state law latches elements, and moreover, they had no choice because they would have been thrown out on standing if they had filed before the election. We talked about that yesterday. Senator Cruz goes on even more persuasively that plainness point out that the Pennsylvania Supreme Court has also held that plaintiffs don’t have standing to challenge an election law until after the election, meaning that the court effectively put them in a catch 22 before the election. They lacked standing after the election. They delayed too long. Now, the result of the court’s gamesmanship is that a facially unconstitutional election law can never be judicially challenged, which is what they say in their filing. Ordinarily, the U.S. Supreme Court would stay out of election disputes, especially concerning state law. But these are not ordinary times. And even more than that, they’re serious federal questions here because we’re talking about the selection of federal electors. And he goes on a bit. So really, Ted Cruz and Mike Lee. And Ted has enormous amount of experience arguing in front of the Supreme Court. Are people to be taken very, very seriously when it comes to this issue that they’re not just former this and former that? These are men that have dirt under their nails in terms of actually filing complaints and arguing complaints in front of the Supreme Court. And the case of Ted Cruz, he he. He was a clerk for Chief Justice William Rehnquist, Mike Lee was a clerk also, I believe, for Scalia, but I could be wrong. So these are these are serious men and this case is a serious case. Now, you don’t have to be optimistic that the court will take it or the court will rule the right way. Of course, that could be an issue. But that’s. That’s self-defeating, that’s self-destructive. I personally am open to any other arguments anybody else has, because the republic’s on the line here. The republic’s on the line. This is a very, very serious case, whatever the courts decide to do with it, even the commonwealth judge under the state Supreme Court. She issued an injunction at. Injunction. And she said it’s likely the plaintiffs are going to win on the merits. She’s totally schooled in Pennsylvania law in the Constitution. Didn’t mean she had a potential remedy figured out. But that’s something the state legislature in the end, Congress would have to deal with. The courts don’t even have to figure out a remedy. But here’s the thing, ladies and gentlemen, this isn’t going to go away. As I keep saying, over and over, week after week. The change, the unconstitutional change that took place, multiple changes in Pennsylvania are still there, they’re still there. And the election board and the secretary of state and all the rest of them are going to continue to operate under them in the next presidential election, will never win Pennsylvania if this isn’t resolved, just like we’ll never win Georgia or Michigan or Wisconsin. We’ve turned into California now, some of us get it. Some of us understand what the hell’s going on here. And it’s serious. And honestly. I’m outraged that here we have a witness. It was a temporary contractor brought in to work on the Dominion voting system. The words coming out of her mouth, what she says on the record publicly in front of a Michigan state committee. Where’s the United States attorney here, the attorney general just said we have no evidence of systemic fraud that could overturn this election. Do you have any evidence of systemic fraud at all? No, no, we don’t. I told you what took place in Delaware County, Pennsylvania. I have the email. I have a copy of it right in my hand. The U.S. attorney wouldn’t even look at it. Would not even look at it. I didn’t make it up. You have a witness here in Michigan. Saying what happened for twenty seven hours, has anybody in federal law enforcement interviewed her? Not one person has interviewed her. Not one. What a damn shame. What a damn shame. I’ll be right back.
Hour 1 Segment 4
Which is why everybody in Washington makes. This is why all the phony frauds and analysts, legal analysts, it’s why they hate me. Because I call it, as I see it, my connection is with you live in it’s my audience, not with them. And by the way, I notice I have a new name, it’s not on my birth certificate, though. It’s right wing Mark Levin, did you know my first name is right wing, Mr. Producer? Not conservative, not constitutionalist. Right wing, so if you support liberty and individualism. If you support the declaration in the Constitution. He come on here and you talk philosophy and history and facts and court cases and so forth, and you don’t throw in with a neo Marxists and Marxist at The Washington Post and CBS News and The New York Times and all the rest of them, your right wing, you see. But if you’re Bernie Sanders, you’re left of center. And if you’re Joe Biden, you’re a moderate. Right wing, these are the propagandists with the big lie, these are the Holocaust deniers and the cover up artists. Disgusting, loathsome sleazeballs. It’s true. Oh, I see my friend Sean Hannity on Twitter. Ari Fleischer is writing a new book he writes called Broken the Story The Mainstream Media’s Decline From Liberal Bias to an all out effort to put its finger on the Mr. Bush’s. Would you send a copy of my book on freedom of the Press to Ari? I don’t think I’ve ever spoken Ari or met Ari, I don’t believe so. Can I write this book already? A year and a half ago now, everybody’s writing. And freedom of the press called them out a year and a half ago. In every way conceivable. That’s why it was a massive bestseller, because you folks read it, you were interested in it. After the fact, it’s a little late, no offense, told you they all love me, and about a half hour we’ll have James O’Keefe from Project Veritas. It’s my understanding at the top of the hour he’s going to release and begin releasing in the next few days. Some of the some of the recordings he has of Jeff, Mother Zakhar. Talking to his senior staff and reporters. About what it is that they’re supposed to cover, because, Jeff, Mother Zakar, even though he’s a big time executive, reaches all the way down into the newsroom. To tell his reporters what to do, apparently. So we will have our friend James O’Keefe on exclusive after the release of the tapes, we’ll hold onto those tapes, Mr. Producer, until he’s on the program and we will make them available. I believe there’s two of them at this point. Correct. And there’s actually one. We’ve broken it up into two that we will play and we will have James, his commentary as we play it. Now, I would suggest to U.S. attorneys around the country. There are hundreds of affidavits. That had been appended. To dozens of lawsuits filed in civil court. Have you looked at any of them? The attorney general of the United States has made a bold statement. That the department has seen no evidence of systemic fraud that would change the results of the election. You know, it’s interesting, ladies and gentlemen, you don’t even need systemic fraud. You can have fraud. With machine mistakes, human mistakes in races where you have 20,000 votes separating the two candidates or 14,000 or 12,000 votes separating the two candidates in the case of Pennsylvania. Where there is a case alleging significant violations of the equal protection clause and Rudy’s been handling this case, the case that I’ve been talking about and Senator Cruz has now posted and Daniel Horowitz has written about, is not even a case brought by the Trump campaign. It’s brought by Congressman Mike Kelly, a courageous man is brought by Sean Parnell, a candidate, another courageous man, a hero at all times, and six other plaintiffs. So that’s not been brought by the camp. Now, imagine if we had serious people riding at these so-called conservative sites, serious people on TV as legal analysts that went through these various cases and actually discussed them. You don’t hear any of that. Instead, you hear us. That’s a tough one. I don’t know about that one. I don’t know like I predicted.